the LiFe sense-- and eleven others...

For the past three days, I've been attending lectures by Christof Wiechert, a pretty big name in the Anthroposophical world of Waldorf Education. He's from Hollandm not Germany, but that doesn't stop me from drawing comparisons and seeing parallels between him and my own grade school Waldorf class teacher, Mr. Ekkehard Heyder. The echoes, literally in the sense of his vocal and verbal qualities and quirks, but also in his mannerisms, even in his age and physical appearance are sometimes a bit uncanny and I've often found myself in these past days thrown back into the classrooms of my childhood, the universe of which this monumental man was the center. For those of you who didn't know Mr. Heyder, I'm posting a link here to a multi-part tribute article in my old school's newsletter-- he passed away this past year and the piece contains some snapshots, photographic and otherwise, that paint a portrait of this educator who so embodied many of the greatest principles of Waldorf and who had such an influence on me and upon an enormous constellation of others. Definitely take a look!

http://www.princetonwaldorf.org/wh/wh_2008-2009small.pdf

Mr. Heyder certainly wasn't flawless,. In fact there was a dark moment in my 7th grade year during which he was brought to court for a questionable "crime"and nearly lost his job; those of you in my Teaching of Writing class with Erick Gordon might remember my multi-genre project in which I took a look back at this experience and the inconsistencies I'd identified between the WALK and TALK of my own Waldorf community. However, I think he still stands as an example, at least he is to me, of Waldorf's potential certainly, but more generally speaking, of education set free of conventions and standards and over-intellectualization and coddling and *; of an education that challenges kids, but always through an understanding and appreciation of their development, both as humans of a particular age but also as individuals. Most importantly, he brought joy and wonder and ferocity and the deepest commitment to his own work as an example for us-- he was true to himself, for better or worse and in spite of whatever anyone else might wish him to be.

I know that this is rambling, and those of your in particular who have no idea who this man is, beyond the above article, probably are yawning by now if you're still reading. But I have a point. TODAY in Wiechert's lecture, this man who so very much reminds me of Mr. Heyder spoke at length about "The 12 Senses" and their relationship to education. Okay. I too was a bit taken aback by this number-- when did FIVE familiar senses, and perhaps that SIXTH, more mysterious, Hayley Joel Osment one, turn into TWELVE? He made a good case though, putting twelve senses into three categories:

Lower Senses: Touch, Balance, Movement, Life

Feeling Senses: Sight, Smell, Taste, Warmth

Cognitive Senses: Hearing, Speech, Thought, Ego (Empathy, really)

You can look into Rudolf Steiner's 8th Faculty Lecture if you want a better, more in depth explanation than what I'm going to partially offer here but essentially, th emain points that I took away from my lecture today were the following:

1. That our "lower" senses are absolutely ESSENTIAL to healthy development. They are the foundation upon which we build everything else; and when they are NOT developed, all kinds of developmental and social and adacemic issues arise. According to Wiechert, and I think I generally agree with this, today there is a true deprivation in the lives of kids of the development of the lower senses-- blame whomever you want-- the media (;)), hyper-attentive and over-involved parents, whatever. The point is that kids don't PLAY FREELY enough as kids; they're really not free to be kids at all. They don't explore the world without always being under the watchful eye of some authority figure or as part of some organized activity. Everything is scheduled and structured in the middle and upper-middle class world, and on the other end of the spectrum, often children are left to be babysat by tools that don't require any real engagement with the world and therefore don't stimulate their sense of AWAKENESS to it. Kids, everyone, needs to cultivate a sense of LIFE in particular, a true sensory understanding of what LIVING is! This happens in moments of risk, of adventure, of discovery, of EXHILARATION. Here also, the essential quality of a DESIRE FOR LEARNING lives. Naturally, kids WANT to learn; it's simply that they need the freedom, the TRUE freedom, to do so, early on and continuously. Hell, we find ourselves as adults needing it! How many of us really FEEL life every day? Not many people I know, but I know at least that I had the experience when I was growing up of getting to explore and spend time in spaces (the woods, forts in my basement, etc.) outside of the grown-up world, outside of time (think about any example from classic or contemporary children's lit-- there is ALWAYS a removed world for kids only i.e. Neverland, The Egypt Game, The Secret Garden, Harriet the Spy)-- in which I took all kids of risks that I'm sure would make my mother, or any parent scream in terror for my life but which were indispensible in my growing into an understanding of the world around me and my place in it--AS WELL AS excitement and curiosity! What more is there that is more important?
A lot of parents, educators, and certainly the educational systems and poilicy makers seem to believe that these "lower" faculties don't need to be developed, that they just sort of unfold or something naturally and that it is the task of education, as early as possible now, to start developing the COGNITIVE senses alone; however, Mr. Wiechert presented some research today that proved otherwise; most concrete, and most interesting to me, was that the underdevelopment of the sense of touch actually leads to issues in language aquisition and usage later on down the road. The two are linked, and the second DEPENDS on the initial development of the first. We have to honor that in educational contexts. Period.

2. That particular temperaments have tendencies toward specific "lower" senses and these need to be developed specially in order to cultivate their corresponding "cognitive" senses. Here are the groupings-- see if you can see yourself, or those close to you:

Phlegmatics: TOUCH --> (if cultivated/developed in a healthy way)--> EGO/empathy for others
Melancholics: LIFE SENSE-->THOUGHT
Sanguines: MOVEMENT-->SPEECH
Choleric: BALANCE-->HEARING

Quick Temperament Guide--> From Wikipedia

Sanguine
A person who is sanguine is generally light-hearted, funloving, a people person, loves to entertain, spontaneous, leader abilities, and confident. However they can be arrogant, cocky, and indulgent. He/She can be day-dreamy and off-task to the point of not accomplishing anything and can be impulsive, possibly acting on whims in an unpredictable fashion. The humour of Sanguine was once commonly treated with leeches. The reason it is treated with leeches is based on the process of the blood being sucked out and being able to understand the effect of the process.

Choleric
A person who is choleric is a doer. They have a lot of ambition, energy, and passion, and try to instill it in others. They can dominate people of other temperaments, especially phlegmatic types. Many great charismatic military and political figures were cholerics. On the negative side, they are easily angered or bad-tempered.

Melancholic
A person who is a thoughtful ponderer has a melancholic disposition. Often very kind and considerate, melancholics can be highly creative – as in poetry and art - but also can become overly pre-occupied with the tragedy and cruelty in the world, thus becoming depressed. A melancholic is also often a perfectionist, being very particular about what they want and how they want it in some cases. This often results in being unsatisfied with one's own artistic or creative works and always pointing out to themselves what could and should be improved. They are often loners and most times choose to stay alone and reflect.

Phlegmatic
While phlegmatics are generally self-content and kind, their shy personality can often inhibit enthusiasm in others and make themselves lazy and resistant to change. They are very consistent, relaxed, rational, curious, and observant, making them good administrators and diplomats. Like the sanguine personality, the phlegmatic has many friends. However the phlegmatic is more reliable and compassionate; these characteristics typically make the phlegmatic a more dependable friend.
Phlegmatics along with the other 3 temperaments should be looked at not just his psychological statements but in view of physiology and how they would relate to attention deficit disorders, dyslexia

So these in some ways seem a little counterintuitive; I think I know which two temperaments I dominantly embody, though, and their characterizations do after some thought make sense. CAN YOU GUESS WHAT I'VE BEEN DUBBED? :)

Just sharing the food for thought on which I've been chewing today...Weichert would argue, as I'm sure Mr. Heyder would-- through action rather than verbal articulation-- that attention to these dynamics should be an integral part of education in practice. Logical, I'd say, as we're HUMAN, not robots. BUT THEN THERE'S THIS PROBLEM which leads me into my first dip into one of my greatest issues with Waldorf:

What upsets me most is that there are schools like Banana Kelly in the South Bronx (where I did some of my student teaching) and the high school in Helena, AK where my boyfriend's brilliant sister is teaching 9th Grade English-- and then there's this removed sphere, separate and pseudo-ethereal. I value the theories, the methods, the conviction with which Waldorf's practitioners work toward its goals and know that the schools mentioned above could certainly benefit from the integration of some of these elements, as well as an actively practiced understanding of the temperaments/developmental qualities discussed in the earlier section. BUT the whole thing's still too ELITIST, too disconnected from the educational and general social reality of the wider world. How can children know themselves in the world if they aren't really a part of that world? Further, I worry that the well-meaning Waldorf teachers have not had, for the most part, much exposure to or training in mainstream education either... The gap, socio-economic as well as ideological, is only widening.

I'm excited to learn and to practice the skills that are being upheld here-- it's a gorgeous and brave thing, really. After my first "Spatial Dynamics" class today (as a student!) I'm so curious to investigate the intersection between academic learning and movement too! I am lucky...And then maybe, I can teach some of the exercises to Jen G. and Annie C. so the students of both the Bronx and the Mississippi River Delta can develop ALL TWELVE OF THEIR SENSES!

Until tomorrow.

Ecucational Investigation-- An Introduction to the Project

So it begins.

The school year, I mean. I find myself in a place at this moment in which I never would have imagined, even mere months ago. The purpose of this blog is simple: to highlight this explosively ironic incongruity in my tiny life and process it, in dialogue hopefully, as a means of looking at a larger picture. Let me explain the pertinent particularities.

This is to be a conversation, an investigation, of pedagogical paradigms and the reality of their actual practice in the world. My background makes this specific situation a bit interesting: I attended a Waldorf school from pre-Kindergarten through Grade 8. After this point, I went to a large suburban public high school, a state university, and finally an Ivy league graduate school at which I received a Masters degree in English Education. During that time, I student-taught at two different public high schools in New York City, attempting to teach English effectively in an unfamiliar world of distant State standards and socio-economic turmoil. I reflected often in these months about the scope and unique quality of my own education and how it had brought me to this calling, had honed me into the person I'd become and here began too my first intellectual investigation of Waldorf Education as a model of pedagogy. In spite of my own success within the paradigm, I was not wholly convinced of its efficacy, of its appropriateness, of its universal truth and application. I found myself frustrated not only by specific pieces of the curriculum and the philosophy behind it, but most emphatically also by the distance, by the disconnect, that seemed to exist irreconcilably between Waldorf and mainstream society. I was angry that Waldorf's work, valuable and wise as I knew some of it to be, was so outside of, almost feeling out of reach of, the majority of the population. I could not reconcile the practice of such an educational system, one founded on a commitment to underprivileged students, with the reality of it-- the fact that it served, serves, only a small, self-selected group. I sought with conviction to make my work as an educator a pursuit of social action in which true change, positive change, through learning was taking place through my hard work and inspiration. Idealistic, but not silly-- I still believe this. However, in spite of my ideals and my experiences, I ended up working not at a public urban school (I wasn't able to find a job) but at a small private school in the Southwest. Here, the Waldorf paradigm wasn't present but the culture of the school, in its exclusivity, still held to an extent this quality of being removed from the true social project of education. I loved my time at this school-- I loved the freedom I had to develop a dynamic English curriculum and work with students who were generally motivated to learn and grow. However, circumstances once again changed and brought me to a new community in which I needed to find another job. I looked around a bit but with the current economy, seized a job that sounded rather intriguing for various reasons though it doesn't exactly fit with my profile. I will be teaching this year as a Games, Sports and Movement Teacher for Grades 1-8 at a medium sized Waldorf School. No English, no inner-city Freedom Writers situation. Right back to where I began my own education, and in the form of a person with a deep commitment to sport and movement but little experience in the field of teaching it, apart from coaching swimming and physical conditioning at my last school. I have come here open-minded, excited for the possibilities and potentials this interesting new perspective on Waldorf, on learning, on child development, this work can give me. Which brings me to the purpose of this blog: here I am going to chart my year as a new Waldorf teacher, untrained save for her own personal Waldorf experience of Grades Pre-K through 8. I want to reflect upon and process my experiences in this forum as a means of investigating both my personal insights into my reactions toward the position, the school, the philosophy, etc. as well as the illuminations that those personal impressions might bring to a comparative look at systems of education in general.

So I'm winded after that long-windedness. I'm certain all of this will make sense as we move forward into the day-to-day of teaching and learning. Important to note now: I have not yet begun teaching; we're still in In-Service until early September; and also, I won't be sharing too many details here-- this blog is not meant to attack, incriminate, insult, or really I guess even to judge anyone, apart from myself so I'd like to keep it as indirect in this sense as possible.

Thanks for reading thus far! Looking forward to sharing this interesting investigative journalistic journey with you!